From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 28 04:36:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 883FD16A403; Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:36:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=julian=449da6880@elischer.org) Received: from a50.ironport.com (a50.ironport.com [63.251.108.112]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1B5643D45; Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:36:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from prvs=julian=449da6880@elischer.org) Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.2.4]) ([10.251.60.61]) by a50.ironport.com with ESMTP; 27 Oct 2006 21:36:42 -0700 Message-ID: <4542DE59.5010500@elischer.org> Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:36:41 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Macintosh/20060909) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Xu References: <45425D92.8060205@elischer.org> <1161999387.872.29.camel@RabbitsDen.RabbitsLawn.verizon.net> <4542D3A8.1040500@elischer.org> <200610281206.13588.davidxu@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200610281206.13588.davidxu@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Daniel Eischen , Paul Allen , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, "Alexandre \"Sunny\" Kovalenko" Subject: Re: Comments on the KSE option X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:36:43 -0000 >> Julian > > As you are emphasizing fairness, I must say I don't believe fairness in > libpthread either, you mean you don't think it is a good idea or that you don't think it works? (sorry, I know that your english is way better than my chinese ;-) > I don't think writing a fairness scheduler is an > easy work, does kernel have made fairness for threads in same ksegrp, > so does libpthread's userland scheduler ? The kernel is only responsible for making sure that one ksegrp (usually a process in my original idea) is not unfair to another ksegrp. What happens within the ksegrp is not it's interest. And no it isn't an easy thing to do which is why I had hoped that some PhD student would have taken it up by now :-) > they don't, it can make threads > in same ksegrp misbehaviored, so what we have done is still process > scheduling fairness even there is ksegrp in kernel, and now sacrificed > fairness between threads. once again, I'm not sure what you mean by that. > > David Xu > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"